Cargando…
Effect of electrical stimulation on patients with diabetes-related ulcers: a systematic review and meta-analysis
BACKGROUND: This study aimed to systematically review the literature to better understand the efficacy of electrical stimulation (ES) for the treatment of patients with diabetes-related ulcers. METHODS: We searched the Embase, Medline, and Cochrane Library databases through July 31, 2021. Original t...
Autores principales: | , , , |
---|---|
Formato: | Online Artículo Texto |
Lenguaje: | English |
Publicado: |
BioMed Central
2022
|
Materias: | |
Acceso en línea: | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC9044601/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/35477391 http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s12902-022-01029-z |
Sumario: | BACKGROUND: This study aimed to systematically review the literature to better understand the efficacy of electrical stimulation (ES) for the treatment of patients with diabetes-related ulcers. METHODS: We searched the Embase, Medline, and Cochrane Library databases through July 31, 2021. Original trials for ES treatment of patients with diabetes-related ulcers with placebo or standard care as the control group were included. The primary outcomes were ulcer area reduction and healing rates. Meta-analyses were performed to compare the standardized mean difference (SMD) in the percentage of ulcer reduction and risk ratio of non-healing rates between ES treatment and placebo or standard care. We used the Revised Cochrane risk-of-bias tool for randomized trials to assess the risk of bias for each included article. Funnel plots and Egger’s test were used to assess publication bias. RESULTS: Compared to placebo or standard care, ES had a significant benefit for the treatment of patients with diabetes-related ulcers in terms of percentage of ulcer reduction (SMD = 2.56, 95% CI: 1.43–3.69; P < 0.001 (Q-test), I(2) = 93.9%) and ulcer healing rates [risk ratio of non-healing rates for the ES group was 0.72 (95% CI: 0.54–0.96; P = 0.38 (Q-test), I(2) = 2.3%)]. Two, four, and three of the included studies were categorized into low risk of bias, some concerns, and high risk of bias, respectively. No publication bias was found. CONCLUSIONS: Based on the findings of this meta-analysis, ES could be used to treat patients with diabetes-related ulcers. ES treatment was effective for ulcer area reduction and ulcer healing, although it had a high heterogeneity level among the included studies. Pulsed current ES has the potential benefit of increasing ulcer healing compared to direct current ES. Further large-scale clinical trials are needed to define the adverse events and potentiators of ES in the treatment of patients with diabetes-related ulcers. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1186/s12902-022-01029-z. |
---|